I was going to go through the article and compare and contrast, but if Bill can't convince you, because he is much more learned than I, what chance do I have. I just wanted to point-out a few things that I thought were problematic with the article.
For starters, it relies on one Man being formed, and another created. It relies on an 8th day creation. I can't believe you have listened to Bill's series and can still hold this view. If you do, there is not much more I can say. But here is Bill's breakdown on the created vs formed theory.
There is an argument put forth by certain clowns that the man who was “created” (Genesis 1) must be different than the man which was “formed” (Genesis 2). Of course, the adam of Genesis 5 was also created, where the word formed does not appear. Yet the same hypocrites who claim to be Israelites thereby have to claim descent from the adam of Genesis 5! If their argument is true, how could they have the Spirit of God imparted to the Adam of Genesis 2?
Deuteronomy 32: 18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. 19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.
Job 33:6 Behold, I am according to thy wish in God's stead: I also am formed out of the clay.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
Isaiah 43:1 But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.
Isaiah 43:7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.
Notice that there would have to be more than one Israel for this theory to hold through the rest of the Bible.
The paper highlights this passage strongly (from your link).
But probably the most striking evidence that Genesis chapter One and Genesis chapter Two are not speaking of the same event would be:
In Gen 1, the plants and animals were created BEFORE man(kind) was created.
In Gen 2, the plants and animals were formed AFTER the man Adam was formed.
This is not even the case, in my Bible Genesis 2:6 describes the mist watering the plants then He forms Adam (we already discussed formed vs created). He then places Adam in the Garden of Eden. So I suppose we have two different creations of plant-life on two different planets ...it -is- a recapitulation. It is a parable that gives more information about the creation of Adam.
Yahweh only made that which is good and follows His Law of kind after kind, the other races are not good!. Negroes, jews, chinks and arabs are mongrelized even within conventional understandings. Yes, even the chinamen are hybrids.
They refer to the KJV 'one blood' passage, Acts 17:26:
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Here is Bill's translation
26 And He made from one every nation of men to dwell upon all the face of the earth, appointing the times ordained and the boundaries of their settlements, 27 to seek God. If surely then they would seek after Him then they would find Him, and indeed He being not far from each one of us.
So the the following assertion is based on an anomaly within the KJV translation. They also speak of allowing themselves to take the blood of devils, saying that all blood is the same. This is not the case, our DNA and our blood is different. Even their flesh is corrupt, ours is good, made by Yahweh.
So we see that the body (flesh) is different from the blood. While all races may have the same blood types they do not all have the same bodies. A father can pass on a hereditary disease through his DNA, not through his blood. We could take another's blood into us and remain genetically the same, but if science ever is able to fuse the DNA of two races then the race of the candidate will be be a mixed race, the product would be a new race that is neither fully one race or fully the other race. Nature does this automatically when parents of two races merge in childbearing.
This is meaningless and is based on a mistranslation in the KJV.
They then make some statement about evil scientist creating human/animal hybrids ...in-fact such corruptions already exists contrary to God Law.
They talk about 'racism', a term created by jewish mass-murder, lenin.
That is not the only flaw in their racist theories, for through Christ Jesus all can be adopted into the Kingdom of God. These racists give us Bible students a bad name, for we sometimes get 'lumped in' with their racist groups because we realize from the Scriptures that God created different races. ...Racism is hate and prejudice based solely upon difference in race. Racialism is the observance of the inherent differences among the various races and tribes of mankind....
Not the sort of thing I want to waste my time with. I don't have time for this, Bill's works already discusses all this things ...I really cannot do better than he has done.
Sorry. But I think you are trying to make some sort of vague connection between Bill's work and 'racism', and preferring this other garbage to allow devils into the creation.